From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tucker v. Dillman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
Aug 21, 2017
Civil Action No. 3:16CV411-HEH (E.D. Va. Aug. 21, 2017)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:16CV411-HEH

08-21-2017

RODNEY ANTONIO TUCKER, Petitioner, v. JEFFREY DILLMAN, Respondent.


MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Dismissing § 2254 Petition Without Prejudice)

By Memorandum Order entered September 19, 2016, the Court filed Petitioner's § 2254 petition. By that same Memorandum Order, the Court explained to Petitioner that he must inform the Court in the event he is transferred, relocated, or released during the pendency of the action. Petitioner was warned that the failure to keep the Court apprised of his current address would result in the dismissal of the action. On August 8, 2017, a Report and Recommendation was returned to the Court by the United States Postal Service marked "RETURN TO SENDER" and "NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED." Petitioner's failure to keep the Court apprised of his current address indicates his lack of interest in prosecuting the present action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Accordingly, the action will be dismissed and a certificate of appealability will be denied.

An appropriate Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

/s/_________

HENRY E. HUDSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Date: August 21, 2017
Richmond, Virginia


Summaries of

Tucker v. Dillman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
Aug 21, 2017
Civil Action No. 3:16CV411-HEH (E.D. Va. Aug. 21, 2017)
Case details for

Tucker v. Dillman

Case Details

Full title:RODNEY ANTONIO TUCKER, Petitioner, v. JEFFREY DILLMAN, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division

Date published: Aug 21, 2017

Citations

Civil Action No. 3:16CV411-HEH (E.D. Va. Aug. 21, 2017)